Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4/6/1987 - Minutes PCw t n~~, 4~~, ~~ PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES City of Orange April 6, 1987 Orange, California Monday - 7:30 p.m. The regular meeting of the City of Orange Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman Greek at 7:30 p.m. PRESENT: Commissioners Bosch, Greek, Hart, Master, Scott ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Jack McGee, Associate Planner and Acting Commission Secretary; Ron Thompson, Director - Department of Community Development; Gene Minshew, Assistant City Attorney; Gary Johnson, City Engineer; and Sue Devlin, Recording Secretary ~" PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IN RE: MINTUES OF MARCH 16, 1987 Moved by Commissioner Master, seconded by Commissioner Bosch, that the Planning Commission approve the Minutes of March 16, 1987 as recorded. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Greek, Hart, Master NOES: None ABSTAIN: Commissioner Scott MOTION CARRIED IN RE: NEW HEARINGS 1. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1577 - SLEEP FACTORY: Proposed retail use in the M-2 (.Industrial) zone located on a 20,500 square foot parcel on the south side of Katella Avenue between Main Street and Struck Avenue. NOTE: Negative Declaration 1132 has been prepared for this project. !- ~~ (Continued from the March 16, 1987 Planning Commission Meeting.) ~' A staff report was not presented. The public hearing was opened. Dan Scinto, 1772 Serene Drive, Santa Ana, is the applicant of this project. Commissioner Hart q~~.estioned him if he was aware of filing a deed so that this use cannot be changed, without that being removed. Mr. Scinto was aware of this condition. He has been in contact with Gene Minshew in trying to work out something acceptable to the mortgagee. His bank mentioned to him they did not want any restrictions on the deed and there might be some problems. The bank also stated the title insurance ~- 'Planning Commission Minutes ' April 6, 1987 Page 2. would not be valid. Mr. Minshew asked the applicant to check with his bank. He proposed a form of declaration by him which would state this information so that it would not be amended without the pr2or written agreement of the City of Orange. Commissioner Hart stated it would. still be recorded against the property; a lien. Mr. Scinto does not want his bank to foreclose on him because of deed violations. Chairman Greek told Mr. Scinto that he probably will not be able to get a loan to build a single purpose building. This building can only be used for a furniture store forever. Chances are the bank won't lend the money to do that. Banks do not lend money for single purpose buildings. He informed the applicant he could not go back to industrial use once this use was approved because of inadequate parking. Mr. Scinto thinks the issue is giving notice to the next user; that they would use it properly. Commissioner Hart stated this will be notice because it will be on the title policy. Mr. McGee gave some clarification to the Commission on this project. Mr. Scinto is located in an industrial zone. Like any other industrial user in that area, he is entitled to conduct a certain amount of retail business. What is being asked for is the possibility to expand the building and to increase the amount of retail activity within that building. It is a very unique retail use that he is asking for. It requires less than half of the amount of parking that is required for normal retail use. He could continue with what he is doing presently, fully legally with no problems or questions, or he could have this application approved and determine if he wants to expand or not. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Scott asked staff if this reverted from general retailing back to industrial, what would be the deficiency in parking? Mr. McGee said the parking requirement for an industrial building is the same as that for a furniture store. The only problem is that he is developing a retail space, which might not be built to the same standards needed for an industrial type use. Chairman Greek is concerned that if this is approved, the applicant will have something he does not want and there will be problems in the future. Moved by Commissioner Hart, seconded by Commissioner Bosch, that the Planning Commission accept the findings of the Environmental Review Board and file Negative Declaration 1132. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Greek, Hart, Master, Scott NOES: None MOTION CARRIED -, ,~ •Planning Commission Minutes April 6, 1987 Page 3. Moved by Commissioner Hart, seconded by Commissioner Scott, that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Conditional Use Permit 1577 subject to the staff's recommendations and emphasizing that Item ~E'2 be changed as per the addendum that was received March 30, 1987. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Hart, Master, Scott NOES: Commissioner Greek MOTION CARRIED IN RE: NEW HEARINGS 2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1582 - WENDELL McELFRESH: Proposed outdoor truck repair within 300 feet of residentially zoned property and to allow move-on of a trailer unit for office use on a 1.54 acre parcel located on the east side of Batavia Street between Southern Avenue and Grove Avenue, addressed 2199 N. Batavia Street. NOTE: Negative Declaration 1137 has been prepared for this project. A staff report was not presented. Commissioner Hart questioned the use of move-on trailers as a temporary office location until the permanent facility was built. He wanted to know what the Code was. Mr. McGee stated the Code has a provision that allows move-on buildings. Commissioner Hart was concerned about the length of stay on these temporary move-on trailers. Chairman Greek questioned why this project was needing a conditional use permit because the usage is the same now. Mr. McGee said it is an industrial zone, but it is within a certain proximity of a residential area. Code states if there is an outdoor use of any sort, other than employee parking, within 300 feet of a residential area, a conditional use permit is required. In addition to that, there is the move-on trailer. Commissioner Bosch questioned why only the north side of the property required a block wall instead of the other property lines? Staff did review that and have recommended the north side only due to the proximity to the residential area and the desire to contain the use from expanding to the north. Commissioner Bosch commented the plan does not reflect accessibility for open truck parking spaces and believes there is enough space on the side to reallocate the space and maintain the same number. The public hearing was opened. Wendell McElfresh, 2213 McCormack, Placentia, feels there is a misunderstanding as to the use of the trailer. It is a small office trailer that is going -, / Planning Commission Minutes April 6, 1987 . Page 4. ...•• ~,,. to be temporary until the time they can construct a permanent building. The distance to the residential area is 268 feet (to the property line); it's over 300 feet to the homes. The conditional use permit is also for truck repair, in addition to the trailer. The storage area is for vehicles waiting to be repaired and there is more space than what is being used. Commissioner Scott asked the applicant what he thought would be a reasonable time for the trailer -- two years? Mr. McElfresh would like five years if he could. Because of budget constraints and to meet the requirements, it will take that long to complete construction. Those speaking in favor of this. application: C. M. Thomson, 625 W. Katella, owns the house on the northeast corner of Southern and Batavia, which may be the only house within the 300 foot ~~'** radius. He was under the impression this conditional use permit was to °~,r legalize an existing operation. What he plans to do is nothing different than what is going on now. Feels the fence along the north side is a waste of time. Commissioner Hart would like to see a permanent office building instead of the block wall. The public hearing was closed. Moved by Commissioner Hart, seconded by Commissioner Bosch, that the Planning Commission accept the findings of the Environmental Review Board and file Negative Declaration 1137. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Greek, Hart, Plaster, Scott NOES: None ~ MOTION CARRIED Moved by Commissioner Hart, seconded by Commissioner Master, that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit 1582, deleting the block wall and substitute a permanent office structure in lieu of the move-on trailer. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Greek, Hart, Plaster, Scott NOES: None MOTION CARRIED Chairman Greek asked the applicant if he understood the condition has been deleted requiring the block wall fence and he is not able to put a trailer in there as it has been deleted. Mr. McElfresh asked if he could still put up a metal building. The Commission stated there was no problem if the Code allowed that. The only problem he might have is the requirement for a 20 foot access as the Fire Department will cite him if it is not kept open. (Condition ~~20) .., Planning Commission Minutes April 6, 1987 Page 5. IN RE: NEW HEARINGS 3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1583 - ROBERT B. KIRK: Proposed addition of a second story to an existing residence in the R-2-6 zone on property located on the east side of Center Street between Palm Avenue and Maple Avenue, addressed 231 N. Center Street. NOTE: This project is exempt from environmental review. A staff report was not presented. Robert Kirk, 231 N. Center, wants to build a second story because they need more space. He likes the City of Orange; it beats moving. Those speaking in favor: Nicky Calagna, 1135 E. quality of life better homes to make it more is it a R-C-D overlay. use permit in order to difference would be of Culver, thinks one of the ways of making the in Orange is to allow people to add to their comfortable. This is not an A suffix zone; neither If it is imposed that he needs a conditional get a two story, she doesn't understand what the the criteria used for all properties. ..~•. Mr. McGee stated there is a provision within the R-2-6 zone which requires a conditional use permit of two story development when it is surrounded on three sides by single story development. The A suffix is a total one story restriction. The R-C-D requires a conditional use permit anytime there is two story development. Mrs. Calagna said when you are talking about a single family dwelling in an R-1 area, then that is when some of .these things were brought up and. looked at. When you are looking at an area that is predominantly R-2 and R-3, which is the case on this one, where it is for multiple dwellings...If you have a lot that is 50 x 130, you will have to go up in order to get three units or four. If he wanted to build four units on a RM-7 or RM-6, he would be entitled to that because he couldn't do it any other way. She wanted to point this out for the record. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Bosch commented it would be helpful to applicants if they would come before the Planning Commission and make their submittal and gain the requirements before spending the time and dollars in having documents prepared. Moved by Commissioner Bosch, seconded by Commissioner Master, that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit 1583 subject to the staff's conditions. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Greek, Hart, Master, Scott NOES: None MOTION CARRIED .~ 'Planning Commission Minutes April 6, 1987 Page 6. IN RE: NEW HEARINGS 4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1585 - PAUL & EILEEN HERTFELDER: Proposed two-story development in the R-2-6 zone, which abuts single- story development on three sides, on property located on the north side of Culver Avenue between Clark Street and Parker Street, addressed 737 W. Culver Avenue. NOTE: This project is exempt from Environmental Review. Joan Wolff, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. In the R-2 zone the Orange Municipal Code requires that a conditional use permit be issued to allow two story development which abuts single story development on three sides. The property is approximately 4500 square feet and con- tains a single story house and a detached one car garage. The house is a bungalow style home, which is listed on the Old Towne Historic Inventory. The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing house and garage and to construct a duplex of approximately 2500 square feet on the property. The first floor of the proposed structure will contain a three car garage facing. Culver. Street and approximately 900 square foot two bedroom unit behind the garage toward the rear of the property. The second story of the proposed structure will be a partial second story located above the garage and will contain another 900 square foot two bedroom unit. The fourth unenclosed parking space required by the Code is to be located along the eastern property line and the side yard setback. The development complies with all R-2-6 development standards. If the Planning Commission decides to approve this application, staff recommends the inclusion of conditions listed in the staff report. The public hearing was opened. Eileen Hertfelder, 720 E. Culver, has owned the property for 10 years. The existing house and garage are to be demolished and replaced with a new duplex. The present structures are of an inferior construction and cannot be salvaged. When the property was purchased, it was appraised as lot only by a local realtor. There was no value in the buildings. The repairs needed now are not possible considering the type of construction and it's existing condition. She feels the proposed plan will be an asset to the City and will not change the character of the area. Those speaking in favor: Maureen Schreck, 446 N. James Street, favors this project being built. It looks very nice and her property is zoned for it. Nicky Calagna, 1135 E. Culver, spoke as an advisory director to a new group that has been formed -Orange Taxpayers Association. They support this project and feels the owners should be able to exercise their property rights and develop the property for what it is zoned. It also complies with the Land Use Element of the General Plan, the zoning, and the Housing Element. Duncan Clark, 205 N. Pine, supports this project. The property definitely needs to be replaced as it is not a good quality unit. ... 'Planning Commission Minutes April 6, 1987 Page 7. Those speaking in opposition: Bonnie Carruth, 743 W. Culver,. knows the house is substandard; that =it needs to come down, but she would hope that a single family unit that would blend in with the other homes would be built. She would like to see the neighborhood preserved. Valerie Miller, 369 S. Pixley, right around the corner from the proposed development. She spoke as a resident of this southwest quadrant of the Old Towne area. The area is single story, one and two bedroom, small, California bungalow style homes. Many of the homes are rentals and the neighbors like the small rental homes. The proposed project is just too big and massive for the area. This area is part of Old Towne also. The residents of this area want to preserve their neighborhood as an Old Towne neighborhood. Dale Rahn, 350 N. Harwood, president of Old Towne Preservation and resident of Old Towne. They are .requesting denial because the property is zoned residential duplex 6,000 square foot minimum. This property is only 4,500 square feet, it is considered substandard in lot size by 1,500 square feet. The permitting of a duplex on this property constitutes an overcrowding of the lot and a precedent in this neighborhood. To permit the building of a second story in this one story, cottage style neighborhood represents a disregard for the character, scale and harmony of this 60 year old collection of homes. It also does not consider the. privacy of the existing neighbors. Feels this lot will be taken up with automobile use in the front. Does not oppose the rennovation of the existing 1923 built home or the building of a single family home. Rodger Mueller, 727 W. Culver, concerned about the parking problem. Agrees the house is a problem, Roy Mueller, 5131 Crescent Drive, Anaheim, would like to see an old house moved onto the property instead of building an apartment. Ann Speth, 419 S. Parker, feels the building is much too large for the lot. A similar building was built on Pixley and it is a terrible looking building.; it is much too large. She would also like to see a single family home built on this property. Susan Speth, 419 S. Parker, feels this proposed dwelling would not enhance the neighborhood as a family neighborhood, but as a rental neighborhood. She would like to see it kept as a neighborhood for families. Barbara Mueller, 5131 Crescent Drive, Anaheim, hates to see a two story home go in which looks down on everyone else. There would only be room enough to park on the street for one car. Mrs. Hertfelder stated the lot size was not any different from other properties when it was purchased on that side of the street. They could build a four bedroom home, which would not cut down the density. There will be enclosed garages and a carport for four vehicles. The house at 743 W. Culver is only five feet from their property line; that is a City regulation. Why should they be further away from her property line than what she is from theirs? It is not feasible to put a small building on this property -, ~_ Planning April 6, Page 8. IN RE: Commission Minutes 1987 because of the costs involved. The public hearing was closed. Moved by Commissioner Scott, seconded by Commissioner Greek, that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit 1585 subject to the conditions listed by staff. AYES: Commissioners Greek, Hart, Master, Scott NOES: Commissioner Bosch MOTION CARRIED Mr. McGee stated there is a 15 day appeal period on any application heard by the Planning Commission. Anyone interested in appealing this application, there is an information sheet on the table at the exit. NEW HEARINGS 5. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1586 - JOSEPH A. GRAMOGLIA, DBA GOLD'S GYM: Chairman Greek excused himself from the meeting due to a potential conflict of interest. Proposed commercial recreation facility in-the M-2 zone on property located on the southwest corner of Main Street and Struck Avenue, addressed as 1096 N. Main Street. NOTE: Negative Declaration 1140 has been prepared for this project. A staff report was not presented. Joseph Gramoglia, 3738 E. New Gateway, is applying for this conditional use permit to put up a recreational facility. It will benefit local commerce and be a tremendous asset to .the City of Orange. Has been a resident of Orange since 1963. His plans are to interface the Fire and Police Departments, as well as local companies, on a benefit program for physical fitness. Mike Merk, 2706 Bourbon Street, has been helping Mr. Gramoglia put together a package. In analyzing the property from a real estate standpoint, there have been several factors that have come up. This is an industrial building, it is approximately 17 years old, on an acre of land, is heavily parked. The parking would definitely be adequate for a facility like this. The average number of people in the facility at one time will be between 55-65 persons. There is a significant amount of commercial traffic already on Main Street. He believes the traffic count is over 15,000, but feels the traffic flow will be monitored very nicely with the traffic signal. They feel this gym facility fits in nice. to an industrial zone. The public hearing was closed. Moved by Commissioner Hart, seconded by Commissioner Master, that the Planning Commission accept the findings of the Environmental Review Board and file Negative Declaration 1140. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Hart, Master, Scott NOES: None ABSTAINED: Commissioner Greek MOTION CARRIED Y _' f Planning Commission Minutes April 6, 1987 Page 9. r Moved by Commissioner Hart, seconded by Commissioner Master, that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit 1586 subject to the staff's conditions. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Hart, Master, Scott NOES: None ABSTAINED: Commissioner Greek MOTION CARRIED Chairman Greek returned to the meeting. IN RE: NEW HEARINGS 6. VARIANCE 1809 - WILLIAM & MARION BARSTOZ+T: Proposed reduction. of five off street parking spaces in conjunction with a 66-unit apartment complex on property located on the east side of Lemon Street between Mayfair Avenue and Collins Avenue, addressed 715 N. Lemon Street. NOTE: Negative Declaration 1136 has been prepared for this project. The staff report was not presented The public hearing was opened. David Aleshire, with the firm of Rutan and Tucker, 611 Anton Blvd., Costa Mesa, .represented Bill and Marion Barstow. The project architect and engineer were also in attendance. The Planning Commission was provided with materials including his letter which discusses the legal issues that are relevant, and a manual that shows pictures of the project, site plan, architectural rendering, etc. The most important thing about this project is that it is an existing project, it is over 30 years old, the condition of the project is not what the owner would like it to be, it has a high occupancy level and low vacancies. The applicant is very interested in rehabilitating the property, adding some additional units and parking. Currently there are 40 units on the property and there are 50 parking spaces. They are five spaces short of parking, which is a 3.6% shortage in terms of the required parking. They can comply with all the recommended conditions of approval if the variance is granted. He believes there are provisions under the Code that give us discretion in terms of approving minor modifications in the parking. Configuration ~ of the lot is a special circumstance that applies to this project. It has extra access onto Glassell. It is about 27% de.f,icient in terms of what the current requirement is regarding parking. They are going to be adding 75 parking spaces, 62 garage spaces; completely conformed to Code with regards to garage parking spaces. They don't believe this is a special privilege. The zoning would permit 24 units per acre and this project comes in at 23. Believes the variation requested is minor. He also believes the impact is on the positive side; not detrimental to the neighborhood. A masonry wall will replace the deteriorating fences; there will be a security system to protect the residents. It will be a nice upgrade for the area. The access is enhanced; the parking is improved. 3 ,~ •Planning Commission Minutes April 6, 1987 . Page. 10. Commissioner Master wanted•to know if the pictures shown were to convey how bad the .condition of the property is in? The refuge area is in sad shape and overspilling. The Barstow's could be cited for the condition of this property. He questioned if the new development would be kept up better than the existing complex? Mr. Aleshire appreciated Commissioner Master's comments. They were not trying to show the problems with landscaping or the trash area. He assured the Commission Mr. Barstow will call the manager about this. With the new development, rent levels will increase and he feels the tenants will respect the property. Commissioner Master is in favor of upgrading the property. Commissioner Hart was curious as to why they were asking for a variance. Hardship is a requirement. And, in your letter (.Item 966), it is stated you can get by with using the legally allowed compact stalls without getting a variance. Mr. Aleshire was under the impression compact car parking in a residential project was something not routinely approved. Chairman Greek rebutted that compact cars were accepted. Mr. McGee interjected the Code directly states that residential uses do not allow compact spaces. Mr. Aleshire said when he looked at the Code, it said you could use compact car parking with approval of the Director; it listed many circumstances. One o.f the circumstances talks about industrial/commercial projects, but there is nothing that .spec ifies what the standard is with regard to residential projects. The owner can provide 12 compact spaces and take out seven full size spaces. Mr. McGee read the Orange Municipal Code, Section 17.76.060A4. Commissioner Hart stated it does not prohibit compact parking. He further stated there is no hardship; if there is, the applicant created it. Discussion centered around ways to develop this property without having to use a variance. Commissioner Hart made a motion that would allow compact spaces for this project, unless they are specifically disallowed in the Code. The motion died for a lack of a second. Mr. Minshew interpreted the Code a little differently than Commissioner Hart. Commercial office/industrial parking lots may provide up to 40% of it's parking use by compact cars. Merely because it doesn't mention residential that it is not somehow controlled. Otherwise, it could be 100% compact in residential. Commissioner Hart stated no; the same standards apply on residential that apply in commercial/industrial. '. ~ 'Planning Commission Minutes April 6, 1987 Page 11. `6brri-' Mr. Aleshire stated the Code has a very broad interpretation. Mr. McGee is not aware of any other residential project that has compact spaces other than senior citizen projects. Chairman Greek asked Mr. Minshew if there was a way to express their desire to include compact parking in this project? Mr. Minshew stated it could be done by putting it in the record and direct the City Attorney to start action. Mr. McGee thought the Commission should make a finding re-interpreting this particular Code section to include that. The public hearing was closed. Mr. Johnson pointed out even though there is no requirement condition on the conditional use permit that there be dedication and improvement along Glassell (.four feet); that will be required to dedicate and improve to an ultimate width. A bond is the normal requirement. This is a normal Code requirement. The Planning Commission discussed compact parking in regards to approving this project without a variance. Mr. Thompson believes this can be accomplished under 17.76.060A5 based on the conversation heard. The Community Development Director has the authority of approving the 40% of uncovered parking. (No covered parking.) This can be handled administratively. Moved by Commissioner Scott, seconded by Commissioner Hart, that the Planning Commission recommend they refer the Barstow project at 715 N. Lemon, be referred to the Director of Community Development for administrative action regarding compact spaces not to exceed 40%, but to meet the necessary requirement as presented. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Greek, Hart, Master, Scott NOES: None MOTION CARRIED Commissioner Hart would like to put into motion an action to make the 40% compact cover multiple residential as well. Chairman Greek stated there was a parking study coming up and they are asking the consultant to look into the aspects of the ratios of cars. This would be an item that should be included in the study. Moved by .Commissioner Master, seconded by Commissioner Scott, that the Planning Commission accept the withdrawal of Variance 1809. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Greek, Hart, Master, Scott NOES: None MOTION CARRIED p'Dlanning Commission Minutes April 6, 1987 ~- Page 12. IN RE : ADJO~TRNMENT Moved by Commissioner Scott, seconded by Commissioner Master, that the Planning Commission adjourn to tomorrow, April 7, 1987, to meet with City Council in Conference Room "C" at 4:00 p.m. The next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting is April 20, 1987 -- study session at 6:00 p.m. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Greek, Hart, Master, Scott MOTION CARRIED NOES: None The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. /sld C c